A personal blog dedicated to supporting and reporting on Rand Paul's US Senate Campaign. And electing a true, honest, small government, Constitutional Conservative to the US Senate from Kentucky.
Many Republicans were holding out, believing that Trey would have an easier time winning the general because he's not as principled. But these polls actually show that Rand Paul gets more of the vote then Grayson regardless of which Democrat is in the race.
I've actually said this numerous times. If a liberty candidate can make it through the Republican Primary -- it's actually much easier for him to get votes from moderates, independents, and soft Democrats, then an establishment hack. Looks like Rasmussen Reports agrees with me. :)
If there was any doubt Rand Paul is a serious candidate for the Republican Senate nomination in Kentucky it can be cast away. Our first poll of the race finds him leading Trey Grayson 44-25.
Paul is, as the conventional wisdom suggests, drawing his strongest support from Republicans who are unhappy with their party. He has a 54-22 lead over Grayson with voters who are unhappy with the GOP in Congress and a 54-18 advantage with folks who think the party's grown too liberal.
His support is broader than that though- he has a 40-25 lead even with people who like the job Republicans in Congress are doing and a 38-28 advantage with ones who are comfortable with where their party is ideologically.
Despite Paul's early advantage this race could change a lot between now and the election, primarily because neither of the candidates are all that well known at this point. A plurality don't know enough about Paul to have formed an opinion of him and a majority have no feelings one way or the other yet toward Grayson.
Among those who do have perceptions formed about them 39% view Paul favorably to 13% unfavorable and 22% view Grayson favorably to 15% unfavorable.
Paul's current strong standing certainly speaks to the increasingly favorable prospects for candidates running against the Republican establishment across the country, especially on the heels of polling last week showing Marco Rubio closing in on or even taking the lead against Charlie Crist. It's going to be interesting to see if a lot more of these insurgent candidates crop up as we turn the calendar to 2010.
PS As a personal note: I apologize for my lack of blogging this past week. I have tendinitis in my fingers, and with work being so busy these 2 weeks before Christmas, I've been recovering at home instead of blogging. I missed reporting on Rand Paul's recent interview with Judge Napalitano, as well as a recent speech he gave on the day of the moneybomb (Which BTW, we raised about a Quarter Million Dollars!) After I'm recuperated in a couple weeks you should see more regular blogging again.
IMHO, We really need to make sure we beat Mr Grayson soundly in the money race this quarter too. On the heals of this poll, that would be a slam dunk!)
This e-mail I just got from Congressman Ron Paul has some more news about Trey Grayson not being the establishment candidate. When the National Republican Senatorial Committee is funneling money to you, it's pretty difficult to not be the establishment candidate.
Dear Friend of Liberty,
My son Rand has the status quo running scared in his race for Kentucky Senate. First, he outraised his opponent. Next, Rand took the lead in the polls. And now, the party insiders are scrambling.
We just found out that the National Republican Senatorial Committee has formed a joint fundraising committee to support Rand's opponent. These party bosses are desperate to keep Rand out of the Senate because they know he will fight against the big government, high taxes and out of control spending that they helped create. Rand can win, but he needs your help.
On Wednesday December 16th, the grassroots are holding a Money Bomb for Rand. This date is of course the anniversary of the Boston Tea Party and the day we made history together by raising $6 million in one day. Please visit www.RandPaul2010.com and consider contributing whatever you are able. Every single contribution will help.
This situation reminds me of my return to Congress in 1996. A host of big name national Republicans did not want me back and came into my district to campaign for my opponent. But, with hard work and real grassroots support, I was able to win and come to Washington to fight for Liberty.
We can achieve the same type of victory for Rand if we all come together!
Again, I hope you can participate in Rand's Money Bomb on December 16th at www.RandPaul2010.com
In Liberty,
Joint Fundraising Committee form filed by the National Republican Senatorial Committee to promote Rand Paul's establishment opponent.
Karl Rove writes the following op-ed referencing the Kentucky Race.
Republicans have also recruited good candidates for their open seats. New Hampshire Attorney General Kelly Ayotte is competitive, as are Ohio's Rob Portman and Missouri's Roy Blunt. Republicans in Florida have to get through a primary fight, but either Gov. Charlie Crist or former Florida House Speaker Marco Rubio will likely hold the seat. (I've donated to Messrs. Blunt and Rubio.) Only Kentucky's open seat vacated by Jim Bunning causes the GOP squeamishness.
Of course, what he really means is it causes the power brokers in the upper echelons of the Republican Party hierarchy squeamishness. The reason for this is because Rand Paul wants to 'depower' Washington (Or Downsize DC.) and return that power to the individual where it belongs. If I were a power brokers, in either party, I'd be squeamish too.
What I find hilarious is, how do you be the establishment candidate -- when "MR Establishment" himself comes out targeting you? I think this is just more proof that Trey Grayson is simply a useful cog in the Republican Party machine. And the establishment, because of that, would prefer Grayson to a principled, honest individualist like Rand Paul who thinks for himself and isn't afraid to shake things up.
Don’t know for sure what Rove is talking about, but if it is Rand Paul’s strong support for reform through term limits, reducing the size and scope of government, and his solid, consistent opposition to Republicans caving in on bailouts and stimulus spending that is causing some Washington D.C. tummy aches, then that’s good.
Rand is leading in the polls in Kentucky because Kentuckians can’t stomach the nonsense from our professional politicians anymore.
I think that's about right. Rank and file Republicans who care about principles are sick of being lied to by the McCains and other big government liberals who have hijacked the party. They want to take the party back. And Rand Paul has the credibility to do just that.
Blue Grass Bulletin has an interesting write-up about the "Grayson/Paul bout"
"If Paul out raises Grayson again ... it will take a knockout punch to beat him"
Round five will be the fourth quarter finance reports. If Paul out raises Grayson again, he will be ahead in the count with only five rounds to go. Certainly he needs to continue to take the fight to Grayson, who is still seen as the champ, but if Paul wins the next two rounds, it will take a knock out punch to beat him.
While Grayson may very well be playing a bit of rope-a-dope and letting Paul punch himself out, Paul is showing little sign of tiring. Grayson packs a helluva hard right hook, a lesson learned from his undefeated trainer Mitch McConnell. But there is always the risk that Paul will go the distance and win in a close decision.
Grayson better answer the next bell on his feet and ready to fight. It doesn't even look like Paul is breathing hard, yet.
I highly recommend reading the full article. Here's another quote showing Rand Paul making the right moves.
The fourth round was all about credibility. At first it looked like Grayson had rocked Paul with a few well landed blows to his mid-section finding discrepancies between the words he spoke about Gitmo and the words he published on his web site. Then came the head shot from the NRSC which questioned Paul's veracity when he reported that they had committed to him to not endorse in the race. But Paul seemed to recover well and before long rocked Grayson with a skillful combination of punches.
First, he deftly brushed aside the criticism and effectively shook off the effects of the hit. Then Paul began showing up again and again on national news programs and seemed to reach deep inside to gather the energy of the TEA party movement, getting the crowd behind him. And then Paul executed a crushing right when he was the ONLY one of the two to get out front for state senate candidate Jimmy Higdon who defeated his better funded democratic opponent despite all of the predictions of a loss.
------sidebar------
(On this last point, Trey Grayson is now laughingly trying to take credit for Jimmy Higdon's success. However, only Paul showed up to Jimmy's event to help fund raise, and only Paul sent out e-mails to his entire Kentucky network to solicit donations for Higdon. What did Grayson do?)
------sidebar------
But Bluegrass bulletin isn't the only one noticing this though. Kentucky GOP strategist Scott Jennings is quoted by WHAS11
“I truly believe the tale of the tape on this race will be on Jan. [31] when the [fourth-quarter] fundraising reports come out,” said Scott Jennings, a Kentucky political operative who previously worked for McConnell’s re-election campaign. “If the Paul people have not been able capitalize on him leading in a survey, then I think that might be indicative that he might have peaked. But if [Federal Election Commission] reports come out and Paul has again led all the Senate candidates in fundraising, then I think a lot of these fumbles sort of go away.”
So we've got a blogger and a GOP Strategist saying that if Rand Paul wins the forth quarter money race, it's sort of all over for Grayson. Certainly, Rand Paul still needs to work hard. (He is, and he will. But if Rand Paul goes into next year with significantly more money then Grayson, he's going to be very difficult to beat.
We might actually get an honest Senator who believes in small government, balanced budgets, private property, and individual liberty! Who would have thought it was possible.
Grayson and heads of agencies across state government have sent letters to State Budget Director Mary Lassiter explaining potential ramifications of 6% cuts that the Governor has called for.
This is so typical of liberals and government bureaucrats. During the boom time governments spend money like there's no tomorrow. But when the contraction hits, they're not willing to tighten their budget.
When you or I get a paycut, we can't go to our neighbor and steal from them to make up the shortfall. No. We have to cut costs and figure out how to make do. But when a government starts seeing lower revenue from taxes. They fight tooth and nail to keep from having to cut costs. Every bureaucracy thinks there's is the one that shouldn't have spending cut.
Is this really the kind of attitude we want from a US Senator? That of a bureaucrat protecting his turf from necessary budget cuts?
He claims to be a conservative. But conservatives LIKE to cut government spending. If he were really running his department like a conservative, he'd be trying to streamline it all along and trying to save the taxpayer as much money as possible. His attitude, instead, seems to be that of a typical government bureaucrat.
Perhaps it is only this particular cut he's opposed to. Still, from the news source it appears like he's cooperating with other heads of State Departments to prevent cuts elsewhere also. If he's a true conservative, he should be looking to slash government spending anywhere and everywhere possible -- including the budget of his own department.
Still, he rejects the label of establishment candidate, saying "my support cuts across all levels."
If anyone is an establishment candidate in the race, it's the one whose father is a sitting member of Congress, Grayson said.
That's ridiculous, Paul said.
"There's only been one candidate feted at the National Republican Senate headquarters with about 20 senators giving him money and only one candidate Mitch McConnell is raising money for," he said.
Ron Paul's part of the establishment? When did that happen? All I remember was establishment Republican Candidates laughing at him when he was predicting the current economic mess that we're all in right now. Ron Paul is popular now, because he was right. But he's popular with the people. That makes him "populist" which, I think, is the opposite of establishment. Seems Trey Grayson has been taking cues from Lindsey Graham again.
Scott Jennings in the article then says that Mitch McConnell isn't establishment.
Well, I guess I'm a bit confused. Being the number 1 Republican in the Senate -- sort of makes a person part of the establishment don't you think? McConnell also voted for the bailouts. Doesn't that make him part of the problem with Washington as it stands currently? (Although Kudos to McConnell for Opposing McCain/Feingold
Also from the article.
One of the most conservative members of Kentucky's General Assembly, Republican Rep. Stan Lee of Lexington, said he takes Grayson and Paul at their word that they are conservatives.
"But we don't have a voting record on either one," Lee said. "What I'm concerned about is whether whoever wins will adhere to the strong conservative principles we Kentuckians want.
"We will not put up with anything less."
I would like to share some information with Rep Stan Lee. (Not to be confused with the Stan Lee who created Spider-Man, and the Incredible Hulk -- That would be cool though right?)
Rand Paul has been organizing an anti-Tax group in Kentucky for years: Take Back Kentucky. What has Trey Grayson done?
Trey Grayson went to a fundraiser where 17 of 20 Republican Senators there voted for the bailouts. He's being funded by bankers and lobbyists from DC. And he and McConnell had plans to have another bailout ball in New York. (Although apparently that one was canceled?) Here's is my question. Who is he going to be loyal to when he votes? The bankers and lobbyists who are funding his campaign? Or the people?
Rand Paul on the other hand has publicly stated that he's refusing donations from Senators who voted for the bailouts.
I think it's pretty clear which one has the stronger principles.
Club for Growth: http://www.clubforgrowth.org/contact/?id=39 (copy and paste into your browser.)
Club for Growth Hours of Operation: 9am - 6pm EST weekdays; closed weekends
Phone: 202-955-5500
Fax: 202-955-9466
Senate Conservative Fund: http://senateconservatives.com/index.php?p=contact (copy and paste into your browser)
Update:
A Commenter on the article writes:
"Brad Cummings, a Grayson backer....Grayson supporter Cummings said he, too, voted for Clinton."
Former Clinton supporter supports former Clinton supporter. Film at 11:00.
This is why Rand Paul needs to Replace Bunning, instead of Trey. Rand Paul agrees that the Federal Reserve is the most corrupt, wealth destroying entity in the Federal Government right now. While Trey is getting funded by bankers who received bailouts and Senators who voted for them, Rand Paul is openly attacking the Federal Reserve and the Central Bank.
This is why Rand Paul is so concerned about the debt, and why he believes we're going to be paying for it through hi inflation. Not next generation, but in the next couple years if we don't get back on course fast.
Of course don't forget his fathers book, End the Fed on the same subject.
Rand Paul was at a fund raising event for conservative Republican candidate, Jimmy Higdon, in Bardstown Monday Night.
Thanks to BlueGrass Bulletin for this photo of Paul being introduced by Senate Floor leader Robert Stivers, flanked by Senator Dan Seum and Congressman Brett Guthrie..
This is really an impressive display I think and goes to show that this disconnect Rand Paul talks about between the national leadership and grass roots Republicans on the local level is real. At an event of local Republican KY state senators and reps, Rand Paul is welcomed with open arms. While at the same time, Trey Grayson (again) is nowhere to be found.
BlueGrass writes:
First, his status as a featured guest shows that he has been taken seriously by the mainstream GOP. Second, it shows that he and at least one other federal candidate, Brett Guthrie, know the importance of keeping a balance of power in Frankfort as the legislature takes up the important duty of re-drawing Congressional Districts and state senate and representative districts following the 2010 census.
From the media reports, and the liberty blogs you'd think the only thing Rand Paul talked about was Guantanamo. It wasn't. Apparently it was actually a pretty successful night for Rand Paul. I don't have video of the entire night, but here's footage of a fairly bold move on Rand's part. If Rand keeps working hard like this, he'll be a US Senator.
Grey Grayson just released a press release regarding the recent debate calling Rand Paul a flip flopper. Other then the fact that Rand Paul makes pancakes to raise money for his charity though, Grayson doesn't have a whole lot to go on.
www.treygrayson.com/news/post/rand-paul-vs.-himself
This isn't a live link because I don't want to increase his link popularity.
First of all, I'm flattered that Grayson used my idea. But I find it rather humorous that Grayson, who's entire campaign has been one big flip/flop (I'm not the establishment candidate./I AM the establishment candidate.) is now attacking Rand for it.
But the attack isn't even really true.
For instance one of the lines Greyson quotes in attacking Rand is,
I think they should mostly be sent back to their country of origin or to tell you the truth I'd drop them back off into battle ... you're unclear, drop 'em off back into Afghanistan. It'd take them a while to get back over here. - YouTube video of Rand Paul speaking in Paducah, KY, 5/8/09.
Let's watch that you-tube video.
Trey's quote leave out this entire sentence. "If you're not going to convict them and you can't convict them or you're unclear then drop them off back in Afghanistan"
The ONLY Reason Rand gave for letting the detainees go is left out of the ellipsis.
Rand's entire quote is thus:
I think they should mostly be sent back to their country of origin or to tell you the truth I'd drop them back off into battle. If you're not going to convict them and you can't convict them or you're unclear, drop 'em off back into Afghanistan. It'd take them a while to get back over here.
Now doesn't that make more sense?
This first quote is full of similar ellipses.
The fact is, in order to use my "Trey Grayson Vs Trey Grayson" idea on Rand Paul, he had to chop up his quotes to DELIBERATELY misrepresent Paul's statement.
I've got to say that's a pretty dirty tactic. But, that's what we're up against now.
I just means Rand needs to raise a lot more money on TeaParty day.
I don't have any footage of the event yet, but the only issue the media is reporting on is Rand Paul's stance on Guantanamo Bay.
Apparently Rand Paul does have a more conservative stance on the issue then his father does. Obviously, all those claims by the Grayson camp of Paul being a libertarian trying to hijack the Republican Party are unfounded.
BOWLING GREEN, KENTUCKY – Leading United States Senate candidate Rand Paul today criticized the Obama administration’s decision to close the Guantanamo Bay detention center and try terrorism suspects in United States Civil Courts.
“Foreign terrorists do not deserve the protections of our Constitution,” said Dr. Paul. “These thugs should stand before military tribunals and be kept off American soil. I will always fight to keep Kentucky safe and that starts with cracking down on our enemies.”
Dr. Paul believes in strong national defense and thinks military spending should be our country’s top budget priority. He has also called for a Constitutional declaration of war with Afghanistan.
I have to admit, personally I'm a bit disappointed by this statement. To me, until they've had a fair trial determining that they are indeed terrorists, we don't KNOW that they're terrorist undeserving of Constitutional Protections. Watch Judge Andrew Napolitano go toe to toe with Bill O'Riley over this issue.
On the other hand, I do agree with Rand Paul that we shouldn't release innocent people in Guantanamo Bay into the United States. I mean, if they didn't hate us before, they do now. Rand's position on the issue is much more nuanced then the typical Republican. Watch the following exchange starting at :40 for example.
Bottom line, this is something Rand Paul's thought a lot about.
I know we all hate the lessor of two evils argument. But seriously. If Rand is only 1% evil, and Grayson is 85% evil, forgive me if I'm going to root for and support Rand Paul.
He's light-years more non-interventionist and anti-police state as his Republican opponent. He wants to bring the troops home from Iraq. He's opposed to the Patriot Act. He's opposed to the NSA illegal spying. He's a freaking DOVE compared to his opponent.
And he's certainly miles more fiscally conservative then his opponent -- who's headed to go accept more bribes (I mean donations) at another Bailout Ball.
This is a very different race from typical ones where both candidates are about the same amount evil. Rand Paul really is a real choice.
And the reality is Guantanamo IS messy precisely because there was no formal declaration of war to begin with, which Rand Paul would have forced.
What we do NOW with these people is only messy, because there was no official parameters of war that an actual declaration would have designated. Jmdrake over at Rand Paul Forums posted the following comment.
The confusion surrounding this all goes back to the fact that we haven't had a formal declaration of war. So there's been this ongoing question of what status these prisoners have. Before going any further president Obama should go back to congress and request a formal declaration of war that lays out a clear plan of what our objectives are and what "victory" looks like. Until then anything done to the detainees is just political posturing. Also special consideration needs to be given the Oighurs. The military long ago deemed they weren't terrorists, and even the worst claims against them were not that they hated America but that they opposed communism in China. I can't imagine president Reagan keeping such men locked up indefinitely.
We need to remember that even IF there was a certain military action that Rand Paul supported, Rand would actually force a declarations of war. Because of this Rand would still filibuster the military conflicts that lead to these kinds of messes. He would refuse to vote for any action with-out first declaring war, which means he's be opposing and preventing ALL current military action as it's processed currently -- even if he DID support a particular war. The mess of Guantanamo wouldn't have happened if we'd had a Rand Paul in the senate to force formal declaration at the time. (And yes. ONE Senator does have a lot more clout then one House Rep. Especially in an evenly divided Congress, I have no doubt a principled Senator could force the issue.)
So when Rand Paul wins the US Senate race, he will be HANDS DOWN the most Small Government, non-interventionist individual in the US Senate.
We need a person in the SENATE who will filibuster all these bad bills. Rand is miles and miles superior in ideology and determination then anybody else in Senate currently. I've still got a chance to get a true Constitutional Conservative in the US Senate. And I'm going to work to get it.
PS, I'll post more when I get more footage and details on the rest of the
issues debated.
From the video: Tray Grayson says, "I'm confident, that "when they hear my view, my experience, my track record. . ."
His Track Record? I guess I'm confused. His job is that of a glorified clerk. He doesn't have a track record. He doesn't have any voting history to back up that he's a conservative. Much less a principled conservative who'll be willing to stand up for beliefs by refusing to vote for bank bailouts, and other principles. If he'd been in the State Senate or State House fighting to cut taxes, maybe; Or fighting for small government from the outside during his courier like Rand has he might then be able to talk about a track record. As I've said before, he really doesn't have ANY proof that he really believes in small government.
Trey Continues:
I have zero, zero concern that Senator McConnell or anyone else that's been a big backer of mine or big supporter, or just an adviser of mine is going to jump ship because of what's going on right now. Because of this little phenomenon, where you guys have this crush on this doctor from Bowling Green who has some crazy ideas. (My emphasis.)
It's usually not a good idea to accuse the media of having a crush on somebody else. Even if it could be true, (There really is no such thing as unbiased media. Of course, typically when they're biased they're biased towards the more liberal candidate. So if it's true that the media loves Rand Paul, it must really mean Rand's doing something right.) you come off as whiny. In this case, I don't really think it is true though.
The fact is, Rand Paul is just working harder, so there's more stuff to report about Rand then Trey. That's all. BlueGrass Bulletin made the comment awhile back that he gets press releases daily or more from the Rand Paul Campaign. Trey Grayson hardly sends him anything. What's he supposed to do?
Then he calls Rand Paul crazy. Are balanced budgets crazy? Is small government crazy? Are term limits crazy?
Is Following the Constitution Crazy?
I'd be real curious to find out which particular beliefs Rand Paul has that Trey Grayson believes are crazy, and why. Personally, I'm looking forward to some debates. Hopefully, I can find out.
Speaking of Cathy, is showing the video of Bailey with Bush Jr. on the side supposed to help her? Many Americans including a high percentage of Republicans have little good to say about him and his bailouts, increasing entitlements and overall drunken sailor spending. Let me know what you think.
Will Rand Paul support the nominee in the general, regardless of who it is?
I just thought this was an amazing answer. He even praises Mitch McConnell for opposing McCain/Feingold which is a thorn in Rand's Kentucky Taxpayers United.
I am very curious about that letter Rand mentions circling the county Republican Party officers though. Perhaps a more relevant question is. "Will Trey Grayson support Rand Paul when Rand wins the primary."?
So, Trey Grayson is vehemently opposed to Rand Paul's characterization of him being the establishment candidate. Rand Paul made a comment to politico regarding his efforts to woo the Club for Growth.
I think our race is shaping up a lot like the other races: There is a sort of establishment candidate and a conservative who wants to defend a party platform that is against bank bailouts and a lot of the things going on in Washington,” said primary candidate Rand Paul
This comment was hotly contested by Hodson, Trey Grayson's Campaign Manager.
"There is no establishment candidate in this race. There is no incumbent. We reject the label. We reject it completely. We are not the establishment candidate."
Apparently Grayson is now not only running for the Senate, running against Rand Paul and others, but now also running AWAY FROM his own image. My how things can change in politics virtually overnight.
So now Grayson is running away from his own image at another Bailout Ball, hosted by Mitch McConnell. (Apparently Mitch found out Rand Paul had principles and couldn't be bought at their meeting.) Good luck running away from your own image and NOT being an insider candidate at a, um, political insider fundraiser. Page one picks this up saying,
Dear Nate Hodson and Trey Grayson’s Campaign: You can’t pretend Trey isn’t the establishment candidate when the NRSC is holding fundraisers for him and when your own campaign tells me that Mitch McConnell and the “Republican establishment” (verbatim) are supporting him.
If I were Jon Stewart, I might do a "Trey Grayson vs Trey Grayson" spot. Politicians used to be able to get away with this kind of double-talking. They would tell one group what they want to hear, and tell another diametrically opposed group what they want to here. And the to groups wouldn't talk to each other and nobody would be the wiser. But. . .
This is the age of the internet baby!
Anybody and their dog can go online now and quickly find out everything you say you stand (or, don't stand for) -- not just the soundbites you want them and their associations to hear.
This is, of course why, Hillary Clinton wants a Government GATEWAY on the internet. I mean, if people are able to do research for themselves, politicians won't be able to lie so much. We can't have that!
Speaking of Rand Paul Sprinting for Senate, I thought I'd talk a little bit about Grayson's campaign. I've become convinced that the reason he entered this race, was because he thought he wouldn't have any competition.
I've already blogged about Grayson's "Rose Garden Strategy" of seemingly hiding from the voters and refusing to comment on actual issues.
But newer information about the campaign becomes increasingly bizarre. Recently Derek mentioned that he got contacted to be a volunteer -- 4 months after he volunteered his services. Now, I was always taught in sales and customer service that you need to follow up at least by the next day, or the odds approach zero that you’ll even have a live contact anymore.
I wonder, if Grayson has ever had a business, or been in customer service where that fast response attitude was important? If not, that might partially explain his lackadaisical approach. A more likely scenario though is that he's a bit bummed that he's going to have to work for this nomination and he's only just now realizing it. I think he planning on sitting for Senate instead of actually running. I mean, the last appearance anyone's heard from Grayson is his phone skit because the moderator called him because he couldn't drive 20 minutes to meet with potential voters.
And then when Trey Grayson DOES talk about an issue, he waxes peripheral. His first big issue is that he's a real Kentuckian. His second issue is that he's support Mitch McConnell for Senate Minority Leader (even though his first issue is kind of a slam on Mitch).
But, by itself this 2nd issue by Trey Grayson doesn't make any sense considering Grayson had just told the Wall Street Journal that he was going to be highly critical of Mitch. If Grayson really IS as critical of the bailouts and critical of Mitch for voting for them as he's was pretending to be in the WSJ, shouldn't he be applauding Rand Paul's failure to commit on the issue of. I mean, why would Trey Grayson vigorously support a person he's ideologically opposed to? Unless he really DOES believe what this spoof site says about him not caring about "rigid ideologies" in the picture caption. So either Grayson doesn't care about ideologies and doesn't believe in anything, or he's just telling different groups of people what he thinks they want to hear.
Rush Limbaugh always says it's best for a candidate to have 3 issues they care about. I'm very curious what Trey Grayson's 3rd campaign issue will be.
I've blogged several times now about how Rand Paul is doing so many events that I'm having trouble keeping up with everything. Almost every day he's got something going on, and many days lately he's had 2 or three events he's trying to attend and juggle.
Well, Derek over at Kentucky Politics noticed this too and says it's the reason behind Rand Paul's meteoric rise in the polls.
Rand and his trusted campaign employees (namely Chris Hightower, Christi Gillespie and David Adams) have been doing events early, often and, well….often. In the month of October, on SATURDAY’S ALONE, the Paul campaign did over 10 events. That’s an event and a half a day. Plus there’s over 20 for the month of October. Taking Sunday’s off, Dr. Paul comes remarkably close to a campaign event PER DAY.
Compare that to Grayson's site. Which, for the most part all he has is Trey Grayson's Jet Tour. I mean, even though he has issues now, these spoof sites here and here have more information about his activities (even though they haven't been updated in a while it seems).
I live in Lexington, so let’s just use it as an example. Buck Ryan holds a Citizens Forum Roundtable on UK’s Campus for the Students, and Rand Paul drives over three hours to get there while Trey calls in, being only twenty minutes away. Rand has come back to Lexington for two other events, a GOP Breakfast and a town-hall. . . Last Saturday, after speaking TWICE earlier that morning and scheduled to speak again in just hours, the Campaign got wind of a tea party in the area so they added it to the schedule as well.
Rand Paul isn't running for Senate. He's Sprinting in a Marathon.
I'm a little late on this (I'm really trying to keep up with all the Rand Paul news for this blog, but he seems to be everywhere! That's a good thing, but it means I have more work to do.)
I'm sure if you're following Rand Paul you've seen this piece in the AP somewhere. (If not, here it is: Ron Paul's Son Borrows Tactics for KY. Senate bid). I first saw it on Google news thanks to Lew Rockwell. As he says, it's really something when the mainstream media start admitting that liberty is popular and a candidate that embraces it is likely to win.
The main stream media still doesn't get it though. They have it in their head that Ron and Rand Paul tell their people what to do and they do it. That's not the case at all. It's quite the opposite really. People who love freedom have chosen people like Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Peter Schiff, and others as people they can trust. Ron Paul wasn't running for the presidency. The people were and Ron Paul was their avatar. Now, in his race, Rand Paul has become a representative of people who love liberty, because of his past integrity.
MEMO TO POLITICIANS: If you want people to campaign for you in a grass roots, guerrilla, bottom-up manner, be honest. I know, I know. You're wanting to find out the Pauls' fancy schmancy techniques. I have news for you. They don't have any. They simply have a message that they believe in, and they practice what they preach.
A more recent article over at The Wall Street Journal, Underdogs' Senate Bids Pressure GOP is a very good review of how conservatives are sick of big government Republicans. The Rand Paul/Trey Grayson race in Kentucky is their prime example of this. (The Video's good too.) From the article, Trey is apparently trying to be seen as anti-establishment now.
Mr. Grayson said he was confident that primary voters in Kentucky know him as a "true conservative." He said he speaks regularly with Mr. McConnell, but that he is not shy about criticizing him, particularly on the financial system bailout. "I wouldn't have voted for it, and he did," Mr. Grayson said. "He and I talked about it, and I said, 'I'm going to criticize you on the campaign trail."
Of course we have excellent video of Rand Paul being a fiscal conservative from before the TARP bailout.
What proof does Grayson have that he was opposed to corporate welfare in the past at all until only 2 weeks ago? In fact, a few months ago Grayson openly grumbled at Rand Paul for criticizing his fellow Republicans who voted for the Bank Bailouts.
All in all, it's a good thing that the GOP establishment is being pressured to at least pander to Constitutional Conservatism.
WHAS11 is reporting that Rand Paul is reaching out to Mitch McConnell! This is very interesting news, as Mr McConnell sort of represents the Republican Party Establishment being the Senate Minority Leader. Will the 2 camps be able to come to terms? If nothing else this is further evidence that Trey Grayson is loosing support. If the same person that threw him a bailout ball is willing to negotiate with Rand Paul, at the very least his support for Grayson must be cooling.
I love this quote, This is the mark of a principled politician, as opposed to one who tried to be "all things to all people." You might not agree with him on everything. But you know where he stands. This kind of attitude is why "Regan Democrats" existed. If you want soft Democrats and independents to vote for you in the general, having integrity is the best way to attract their vote.
If the Republicans want to win in November, they need to realize that.
It's also great to see the support he's getting from his family.
I want to thank everyone who joined our conference call last Tuesday night. Over 19,000 people participated in our discussion about eight of the most important Senate races taking place across the country.
--snip--
KENTUCKY - There are several Republicans and Democrats running to fill this open seat. The most viable Republicans in the race are Secretary of State Trey Grayson and Rand Paul, an eye surgeon and son of U.S. Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX). It's not clear yet which candidate conservatives should support.
If you have information about this race, please send us your tips.
http://senateconservatives.com/index.php?p=contact&c=
Personally, I'm a bit confused.
Rand Paul won their web poll: 706 (87.9%) to Trey Grayson's 62 (7.7%) with 19 (2.2%) undecided. 1 person voted "other."
I can only wonder if the reason for the above wishy-washy e-mail is, maybe they're feeling pressure from big donors and establishment types. It might be a good idea to mention to them, how Rand Paul can help increase their legitimacy and exposure, more then his conservative credentials.
Rand Paul certainly would be a better candidate for them to endorse from that perspective. He can get on national TV fairly frequently, which would help their profile if they endorsed him. He also practices what he preaches, whereas Grayson, by being a career politician likely won't, which will bring them shame in the future. Considering Grayson used to b a Bill Clinton supporter, it's possible he'll hurt their profile in the short term as well.
So, feel free to send them a tactfule-mail, encouraging them to support Rand Paul. No yelling, or screaming, or cussing. It's vitally important that we elect a principled honest Constitutional Conservative in the US Senate. It might be worth mentioning Rand Paul just received the endorsement of the Republican Liberty Caucus, as it shows that Rand Paul is a true small government guy, as well as show that he's a credible candidate who can win.
. This is the simplest easiest to read book about why we're currently in the financial mess that we're in. The federal reserve destroys the value of our money to pay for all the excesses of the government, and this causes inflation.
on the same subject.